Link to full article at The Chicago Tribune
I wish I could say I was surprised by the opposition to the proposed Broadway upzoning, but after 15 years of living in Edgewater, this feels like another instance in which my neighbors, who are otherwise well meaning, will end up putting parking over people and their own property values over everything else.
In case you are unfamiliar, the Broadway upzoning would allow for more housing along Broadway Avenue from Montrose to Devon Avenue. That sounds great to me: What better way to support the Lawrence to Bryn Mawr modernization project than to allow people to live near our elevated trains, truly one of the advantages our city can offer people from all walks of life. It is not “wishful thinking” that building housing by the trains will reduce the amount of cars in the neighborhood; it’s how cities work!
Moreover, the sort of urban infill housing that the upzoning would provide is exactly what our climate needs. First, density facilitates human-powered transportation and requires fewer resources to provide more utilities to homes. And, perhaps more importantly, this sort of development prevents urban sprawl. We may not have crude oil or rare earth metals, but thanks to the glaciers, Illinois has something even better: the most arable topsoil on earth. Building in the city protects our state’s vital agricultural industry, allowing us to keep food on the table literally.
Upzoning will also be good for the economy! Rather than being “zoned out of business,” existing neighborhood stores will have more customers within walking distance. New businesses will have regulatory clarity. And the increased tax revenue from upzoning will help us fund our city’s important services.
Finally, study after study shows that building more housing keeps rents low. This is both in the short term, when a building incorporates affordable housing units, but also in the long term, as increasing supply keeps demand in check. Chicago has seen some of the highest rent rises in the country lately, threatening our status as an affordable city.
If I were more cynical, I might think my neighbors were cheering this on. Perhaps there are folks who want housing to stay scarce in Edgewater so that they can protect their own property values. I hope that is not true, because nothing will make our homes more valuable than Edgewater continuing to be a desirable place to live.
In this house, we believe in upzoning Broadway!
— Bryan Duff, Chicago
Much-needed growth
Rezoning Broadway will not be as dramatic as opponents such as Patricia Sharkey think it to be (“Edgewater residents offer a win-win compromise for Broadway,” Sept. 2), and it certainly won’t change Broadway overnight.
In its current state, Broadway is a Frankenstein’s-monster corridor; a mishmash of quaint low- to mid-rise buildings interspersed between large, vacant lots and strip malls that contribute to the urban heat island effect and are generally an eyesore. These empty lots are the properties that the Department of Planning and Development has rightly deemed to be underutilized and are not accessible to the 38.5% of households in Edgewater that do not own a vehicle. They are also the lots that developers are most likely to build on first because of the low or zero cost for demolition work, so fears that existing businesses will be pushed out are unfounded.
The claim that taxes may increase with the rise in property values when the rezoning proceeds is inconclusive at best. There are more factors at play that determine the tax rate a homeowner pays than the value of adjacent properties. Not to mention that once these properties become fully developed, the owners will be major contributors to our local tax base, which will actually benefit homeowners. But regardless of whether or not Broadway is rezoned, property values have risen and will continue to rise on the Far North Side because our neighborhoods are amenity-rich and desirable, and the best way to manage these price increases is through building more homes, not by starving supply and ignoring demand.
Sharkey also claims that parcels on the west side of Broadway “cannot absorb high-rises without overwhelming adjacent neighborhoods.” For starters, seven- to eight-story buildings are not high-rises. Not to mention there are existing buildings on Broadway’s east side that are actual high-rises, and they do not overwhelm the neighborhood in the slightest. Building ground-floor retail with homes on these parcels will connect the east and west sides of Broadway once more and will help restore its neighborhood character before it was razed for car-centric planning.
They say the best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, but the next best time is now. That is what the Broadway plan is in its essence. It’s a rejection of the short-sighted downzoning that took place along this corridor two decades ago and is instead an embrace of a future of much-needed growth, exciting possibilities and new neighbors.
— Noah Ayoub, Chicago
Opposition to density
It is not surprising that we have seen recent opinion pieces opposing new housing: Patricia Sharkey’s op-ed on Broadway and Corinne Svoboda’s attack on the Old Town Canvas project (“YIMBY support for Old Town project sets dangerous precedent,” Sept. 4). With Old Town moving forward, Broadway’s upzoning headed to a vote, the elimination of parking minimums near transit and the potential approval of accessory dwelling unit legislation, Chicago is reaching a tipping point. The pro-housing YIMBY movement has arrived.
Sharkey and the Edgewater Residents for Responsible Development (ERRD) claim their alternative has broad community support. The data says otherwise. The Department of Planning and Development received over 1,600 comments on Broadway, the majority in support. The Chicago Plan Commission saw 450 letters, with 300 backing the proposal. ERRD has created delays by threatening to sue the city, hoping to pressure Ald. Leni Manaa-Hoppenworth into walking away from a plan that reflects broad public input. My neighbors and I are grateful she and the city have not bowed to this.
Sharkey also argues that the east and west sides of Broadway should be treated differently because of lot depth. What does lot depth have to do with density? Nothing. For decades, Broadway has been used as a barrier to protect the wealthier blocks to the west from sharing growth with the denser, more racially diverse blocks to the east.
Meanwhile, Svoboda tries to paint the Old Town Canvas developer as some big scary out-of-towner because its LLC is incorporated in Delaware, a routine practice. It has offices in Chicago.
Concerns about affordability are real, but comparing rents in new buildings to those in 1990s apartments is misleading at best. Of course older units are cheaper, just as used cars cost less than new ones. And where do used homes come from? Today’s new construction.
And let’s be clear: We are locals too, homeowners and renters, advocating for more neighbors and stronger communities. Criticizing YIMBYs for organizing online is comical when the opposition has spent decades mobilizing to block housing — thus driving up our housing costs.
The truth is simple: Anti-housing activists are upset because they are finally starting to lose and Chicago is finally starting to win.
— Neville Hemming, Chicago
Affordable housing
One part of Corinne Svoboda’s commentary was very puzzling to me. She cites the 2023 American Community Survey to make the point that apartments built more recently cost more to rent, whereas apartments built less recently cost less to rent. That survey data clearly suggests to me that the best time to build new housing in Chicago was yesterday and the second best time is now. Today’s new housing becomes tomorrow’s old (and more affordable) housing. Svoboda seems to not make this connection.
Is she seeking a greater number of affordable housing units? She doesn’t say. Very puzzling.
— Ben Nagy, Chicago
Mayor’s responsibility
I’m sure many parents out there have experienced the same problem. An adult child, living above their means, refuses to address the difficult decisions to manage their situation and instead asks the parents to help financially, blaming anyone but themselves and wanting an unaffordable lifestyle. Good counseling says to make them take responsibility first before offering help.
It is time for Chicago’s childish mayor to take responsibility for a budget that is no longer affordable because it was previously supported by temporary federal funds, streamline the city, stop blaming others, and stop asking the taxpayer or Springfield to help until the city has taken the painful steps to put its own house in order.
— Joseph Kimmell, Chicago
Call for transparency
For once, Paul Vallas made a good point (“The forgotten election for chief judge of Cook County,” Aug. 29): The lack of transparency in the Circuit Court of Cook County does feel “medieval.” This issue extends far beyond Cook County, as Illinois is one of just a handful of states where the judiciary isn’t subject to the Freedom of Information Act or other public access laws.
That said, it was incredibly confusing (albeit unsurprising) to see him celebrating State’s Attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke while simultaneously decrying his perceived lack of transparency from Chief Judge Timothy Evans.
Since taking office, O’Neill Burke has scaled back or eliminated accountability and transparency measures. One of her first actions in office was to pull the office’s public data dashboard. When questioned multiple times about why she removed the old dashboard, the state’s attorney has focused on one inaccurate data point that was most likely just a glitch or clerical error.
She’s also chosen to stop maintaining and publicly disclosing lists of cops who are known to lie in court or can’t be trusted because of their past and ongoing misconduct and implemented a “felony review bypass program” that allows police in majority-Black neighborhoods to file felony charges directly without prosecutors’ oversight, despite public outcry.
If we’re going to call for transparency from court stakeholders, let’s ask for the same transparency from everyone, not just the people we dislike.
— Stephanie Agnew, co-executive director, Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts
Chief judge selection
The opinion piece by Paul Vallas has some interesting discussion points but is off-base concerning the law of selecting the chief judge of a circuit court.
The current chief judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County is Timothy Evans, whose term as chief judge is expiring. On Wednesday, an election will take place among the Cook County circuit judges to select a circuit judge as chief judge. Vallas bemoans that the “clandestine voting process” is “held behind closed doors” and that the judicial politics in the process are “medieval” and they lack “any moral code or transparency.”
However, the Illinois Constitution states: “Circuit Judges in each circuit shall select by secret ballot a Chief Judge … to serve at their pleasure. Subject to the authority of the Supreme Court, the Chief Judge shall have general administrative authority over his court.”
If a chief judge should be removed, the circuit judges or the state Supreme Court has the constitutional authority to do so. And, if the voting public is unhappy with a chief judge (which Vallas hints at), the voters can reject his or her retention in office as a circuit judge.
Remember in the 1970s, Chief Judge John Boyle was defeated in his bid to be retained?
— Dennis Dohm, retired judge, Oak Lawn